The first study utilized a sample of 20 Vietnam combat veterans who were randomly assigned to one of three groups, one of which being EMDR (Albright & Thyer, 2009). While the therapist used in this study was EMDR trained, the extent of that training was not indicated. Only two sessions were provided, and repeated measures ANOVA yielded no significant effects for any of the psychological measures (Albright & Thyer, 2009). The second study utilized 25 Vietnam combat veterans who were randomly assigned to one of two groups, one of which being EMDR (Albright & Thyer, 2009). Treatment obedience was uncertain, as the control group was allowed to seek other treatment during the study (Albright & Thyer, 2009). In addition, Albright and Thyer (2009),
…show more content…
Length of treatment, level of therapist training, and treatment obedience were unclear (Albright & Thyer, 2009). Results indicated that veterans treated with EMDR did better than the depression group on most variables, and better than the biofeedback on all variables (Albright & Thyer, 2009). However, as clients were not randomly assigned, and there was a high probability of Type 1 error, Albright and Thyer (2009) remained skeptical. The forth and final study that will be discussed utilized 51 Vietnam combat veterans. Stratified randomization was employed by assigning the first 20 clients to either an EMDR group or an EMDR group without the eye movements (Albright & Thyer, 2009). The therapist had completed level two EMDR training, but the treatment was not standard EMDR protocol because there were only two sessions used (Albright & Thyer, 2009). On the post-test no significant differences were found between all conditions, and it was indicated that after a six month follow up there was a reduction of treatment effects in this study’s participants (Albright & Thyer, …show more content…
Albright and Thyer (2009), believed these limitations increased the chances of random error and decreased the overall sensitivity to detect significant treatment effects. In conclusion, Albright and Thyer (2009) stated that their review illustrated that there is a lack of evidence to support the effectiveness of EMDR on combat veterans with PTSD. Moreover, this topic should be researched further before being used as a common treatment strategy for this population (Albright & Thyer,
Length of treatment, level of therapist training, and treatment obedience were unclear (Albright & Thyer, 2009). Results indicated that veterans treated with EMDR did better than the depression group on most variables, and better than the biofeedback on all variables (Albright & Thyer, 2009). However, as clients were not randomly assigned, and there was a high probability of Type 1 error, Albright and Thyer (2009) remained skeptical. The forth and final study that will be discussed utilized 51 Vietnam combat veterans. Stratified randomization was employed by assigning the first 20 clients to either an EMDR group or an EMDR group without the eye movements (Albright & Thyer, 2009). The therapist had completed level two EMDR training, but the treatment was not standard EMDR protocol because there were only two sessions used (Albright & Thyer, 2009). On the post-test no significant differences were found between all conditions, and it was indicated that after a six month follow up there was a reduction of treatment effects in this study’s participants (Albright & Thyer, …show more content…
Albright and Thyer (2009), believed these limitations increased the chances of random error and decreased the overall sensitivity to detect significant treatment effects. In conclusion, Albright and Thyer (2009) stated that their review illustrated that there is a lack of evidence to support the effectiveness of EMDR on combat veterans with PTSD. Moreover, this topic should be researched further before being used as a common treatment strategy for this population (Albright & Thyer,